To request that all parents please ask

[SunshineAndShadows]

... Before you let your child loose on a strange dog!

I was just out with my two hounds, both friendly beasts but bouncy when out walking and neither enjoy contact with children as they've had unpleasant DC experiences and will avoid them as much as they can.

Both dogs off lead but under control by me when I see a nearby mum release her toddler (very small, no older than 2) in my direction. He toddles forwards and I put a hand on each dog's collar so that I have full control (no time to clip on leads) and mum cheers him on.

I eventually have to do a crazy toddler knee block whilst holding both dogs and saying 'no' very firmly, which stops him in his tracks. Mum then comes over and stands there expectantly. I was wordless with astonishment and eventually she pulled him away saying 'oh dear, the doggies don't want to play'.

I felt like asking her if she also let him play with knives and electric sockets (but of course I didn't)

AIBU to expect that my dogs and I should be able to walk peacefully without attacks from uncontrolled children?

Deluded townie?
My DH is a bovine vet (although he is from Glasgow so I guess a townie)I am from generations of farmers and we live on a working farm.dogs off leads are a huge problem.

YANBU I've had this happen several times but when on horses. The fat mule was walking along quietly but had two 5/6 year old kids suddenly come running at me full pelt right up behind him!! I bellowed at them to stop and back off, luckily they did. Parents did nothing, said nothing just blithely carried on their country walk. Mule actually behaved himself for once but shudder to think if he'd double barrelled.....
Also the idiotic mother feeding bag of bread to random group of loose horses in middle a field with two children and wondered why they mugged her. So, so dangerous.

Right brioche so all the farmers you know who have public footpaths/ right of way on their land would all keep their working dogs on leads happily would they? Not one I've ever met would be up for that. It would certainly be an amusing spectacle when it comes to herding or ratting. One man, an extending lead, half a pound of amphetamine and his dog just doesn't have the same ring to it. As for members of the public with out of control dogs round livestock, that's already got rules that don't work in practice. Expecting the land owner to keep their dog on a lead would hardly help.
I also find it questionable that someone from a farming background, where loose dogs are par for the course, would not only have such an ott reaction to dogs in public, but would misinterpret the op as dogs likely to bite. Perhaps your dh could ask his clients if they'd be up for the idea of sticking their farm dogs on extending leads for work. And maybe their cows too, incase they approach people on public rights of way.

No Brioche my dogs are not likely to snap at children - that's what the term 'friendly' means. They avoid children, but will tolerate being stroked, they just don't enjoy it it so I don't force them to interact in a situation that makes them uncomfortable (I have explained this in previous posts!) They understand this and seek reassurance from me if worried. I would never put them in a situation where they would be trapped by a child - that's a dangerous situation regardless of the dog and its previous learning experiences. And I'm not an idiot.

You can keep ranting on about all dogs should be on leads as much as you like Brioche But it seems that you can't stretch to explaining why that would have made the slightest difference in this situation - so why keep banging on about it??

*No I have interpreted

'neither enjoy contact with children as they've had unpleasant DC experiences ' as 'they are nervous around children and might snap'*

Except that's not the bit you originally quoted.

Also, yes, do explain how the dogs being on leads would have helped in this situation, since you keep ignoring that.

"One man, an extending lead, half a pound of amphetamine and his dog" laughing so much I snorted tea!

This seems like it's meant to be a clever point about how children scare dogs as much as vice versa, hence all the language about 'body blocking' and saying 'no' in a firm voice, not to mention the heinous 'attack'. What did you think the toddler was going to do to your unleashed dog - bite its face off? Er, probably not.

If this actually happened, then yes, when the mother saw that there was a woman with two unleashed dogs, she was silly not to keep her child safe and close by. But I'm not really convinced that it did, and I'm certainly not convinced by the point you seem to be trying to make.

Oh, seek, get a hobby other than troll spotting.

You're clearly not an animal person, or you'd be able to understand that, although WE know the toddler won't really hurt a dog - although a determined toddler COULD step on a dog's foot / tail, poke it in the eye, scratch it - the dog still perceives it as a threat and it causes distress to the dog. I wouldn't want my animal scared by a rampaging toddler because it would frighten it. I realise caring about an animal's peace of mind and wellbeing must be a difficult concept for you.

what is your point then seek? That parents don't ever let their kids approach animals without asking, therefore the op must be made up? Or that if they do, the dog should just suck it up?

Oh, absolutely parents or children should ask if it is ok.

As importantly, dog owners should ask. My dc is terrified of dogs, doesn't stop dogs from rubbing their nose on the knees or putting their paws on chest of a petrified child who also 'does not want to play'.

Oh knack off, eh. I don't want any animals mistreated, but I am not about to get exercised about two dogs being frightened by a toddler. And I find the description of the toddler's actions in such canine terms really distasteful.

Children matter more than dogs, IMO, and I've met far more dog owners who will tell you 'he's just playing' or 'he won't bite' than I've ever seen 'rampaging toddlers' frightening these animals. In fact, revise that - I've seen the former shit loads of times and the latter never.

Ps still I just had a mental image of one elderly farmer I know attempting to round up sheep with his extremely fast, agile and nippy dog on a lead!

My point is that I think this reads like quite a carefully contrived way to defamiliarize the much more often seen scenario in which a dog walker hasn't put his/her animals on a lead and a parent on MN asks if they are being unreasonable to wish they would, as their toddler found the approach of a large animal alarming. I think that the use of 'attack' and 'body block' etc all indicates a slightly clunky way to make us realise that children are frightening to dogs.

I expect that OP did indeed encounter a badly managed toddler and was irritated, but I find this post quite silly and forced.

A toddler has literally never been known to run up to a dog and maul it, bite its face, or kill it. Dogs are more dangerous than toddlers. This is basic.

I am both dog owner and parent seek and I can easily say I've witnessed more moronic parents than dog owners. Which statistically fits, because there's more people with kids than dogs. And don't forget, if I or anyone else allow my dogs to hurt a child, they can be put down. If you or anyone else allows their kids to hurt my dogs, that behavior can be repeated ad finitum with no repercussions, or legal ramifications on your parenting.

My dog is big, he's an American bulldog. We were having some dinner in a beer garden once and he was tied to some sort of railing while we ate. A baby, tiny little thing and obviously an early walker came over, encouraged by her mum and threw her arms around his neck for a cuddle. Lucky really that he's friendly and fine with kids because frankly if he hadn't been he was three times the size of this child. I didn't need to stop her because I knew she'd be ok with him. But her mum didn't know that. I boggled a bit.

Oh, I absolutely think parents who let their children do that are wrong and crazy.

On the other anecdotal hand, my daughter quite liked dogs until she was three, which I was pleased about, though she wouldn't ever have marched up to one. Then one day we were walking along and two moronic women with a huge animal let it run up and bark at her, blocking the pavement so we couldn't get by, making no effort to rein it in, and laughing. After that, she was terrified for ages every time we walked past a dog, even as I would say like a mantra 'it's a nice dog, oh what a nice dog that looks like, nice dog' etc. Many dog owners don't realise how alarming their animals can be, and still more don't acknowledge how dangerous they actually are. And ultimately, for me, it comes back to the fact that a dog can harm a child much more than a child can harm a dog.

Just as the bloody woman we saw then was obviously not representative of all dog owners, the mother who didn't keep her child safe in OP's post is not representative of all parents - and I do think if you're the one with the animals, it's your job to keep them on a lead where you might see other people. The most glaringly wrong thing I see in OP's post is that she didn't do that, not that the child was running about being silly (which is also wrong).

Adult humans are far more dangerous to children than dogs. Dogs don't randomly attack kids, there is always an adult at fault. No dog of mine has ever hurt or threatened a child. However plenty of badly brought up kids have attempted it in reverse.
One parent doesn't speak to me anymore, because when their old enough to know better child kept hurting one of the cats, it resorted to scratching them, and warning them it would follow up with a full on attack. Kid funnily enough doesn't mess with animals anymore. Had the same with other animals in different situations. If it had been a dog though, despite the fact it was entirely the child/ adult in charge at fault, it's only the dog and the owner who are blamed. Shitty parenting is much easier to continue than shitty dog owning.

how would a lead have changed anything seek

she had hold of them by the collar which has no slack. unlike a LEAD which gives over a metre of "freedom"

If the animals had been on leads, she wouldn't have had to juggle about with bag she was carrying and quickly grab the collars, would she - so I would imagine would feel a little more in control from the off. Up until the moment she quickly and reactively grabbed the dogs and kept them close, they were untrammeled, and they should have been.

Why? they were behaving and cane when called and she had them fully in controlled. unlike the idiot mother who sent her kid over.

parent in he wrong here not the dog owner.

Bollocks to keeping my dogs on leads to make it quicker to grab them if I encounter loony parents. I'll stick with training thanks. I keep my dogs and other animals away from people unless the person initiates making contact in some way, parents can do the same with their kids.

I've told dd that if there's a dog off the lead she is to come back to me or stand still with her arms behind her back. If it's on a lead then it could be for a reason so she gives it space says hello and walks on unless the owner deliberately stops and asks if she would like to say hello. She also doesn't approach dogs whether she knows them or not in case they are having an off day so waits for them to approach her if she knows them. (This was due to her wanting to play with her nans dog and thankfully only getting a scratch but enough to make her cautious) I usually shout at owners who let their dogs loose to jump up at me or dd. Drives me doolally. Yes your dog may be used to children but my child is not used to dogs so call it off. Had one dog one day come running over to my dd while we were having a picnic and steal her sandwich from her hands. The owner was on the phone and didn't give a monkeys. Just dragged the dog off and walked on.

because she was carrying bags (think it was a bag originally, then bags), and had to grab them with her hands full, and do a 'crazy toddler knee block'. This would have been uneccessary had she kept them on a lead.

Absolutely agree that a mother who 'sends' or 'releases' her child in these circumstances is insane - but it seems exceptional behaviour and not really worth lecturing to the world about in these terms. Keeping dogs on a lead isn't just about the contingency of meeting 'loony parents' - plenty of perfectly sensible parents wouldn't appreciate the approach of 'friendly bouncy' (and remember one person's 'friendly bouncy' is another person's terrifying) dogs either.

OP said they were under control and she held their collars for full control as the toddler was still coming. It makes no difference as to whether or not they were on a lead the mother shouldn't of deliberately sent her child off in the direction of dogs she didn't know. Which she probably still would of done if they were on the lead

My dogs don't approach anyone, bouncy and friendly or otherwise, unless given express permission by someone they see as a higher up member of their pack. Nor do they do anything that any rational person could interpret as even likely to approach. Therefore I'm not about to spoil their freedom, and more importantly for this thread the legal rights of dd and I to enjoy public spaces however we see fit within the remit of lawful behavior, in order to pander to someone elses irrational interpretation of dog behavior.
And yes, the odd occasion some entitled arse has seen fit to tell me from a distance to put my clearly under control dog on a lead, when it's nowhere near them, close to me and not doing anything that could rationally be viewed as even noticing them, let alone likely to get within 10' of them, I not surprisingly refuse.